Can Komodo give knight odds in standard chess to a master?

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

Just a colloquial observation, but I am not that surprised by this result. I am 2100 FIDE, and (in my experience) can beat any engine with knight odds fairly consistently. It's just relatively straightforward to play simple openings and trade down.

Two pawns I lose nearly every single time, regardless of who moves first, which pawns, etc. I suspect three pawns, or exchange plus pawn(s) would be the same. I also suspect that it would be much harder to consistently convert a knight handicap against a super GM for example.

My theory is that:
1. The path to win from a whole knight up is far simpler to find, certainly for humans, than other close or "equivalent" (in terms of cp) handicaps.
2. Top engines don't realise that they need to complicate the position against a human player with an extra knight. A grandmaster does. I don't think this knowledge is particularly useful in computer vs computer games (although surely complicating when you are losing is a good idea in theory, but AFAIK no one has made it work in terms of elo), but it would likely help in this sort of handicap match.

I agree with most things except that:

- exchange odds is much harder than 2 pawns odds, probably by at least 80cps
- any 2200 player would beat Kasparov at LTC at knight odds, no matter the attempted complications

as said, knight odds, especially at LTC, is at least 2.5 times easier than 2 pawns odds and maybe 3 times easier than exchange odds.

[Jesse Gersenson]

Just a colloquial observation, but I am not that surprised by this result. I am 2100 FIDE, and (in my experience) can beat any engine with knight odds fairly consistently. It's just relatively straightforward to play simple openings and trade down.

Two pawns I lose nearly every single time, regardless of who moves first, which pawns, etc. I suspect three pawns, or exchange plus pawn(s) would be the same. I also suspect that it would be much harder to consistently convert a knight handicap against a super GM for example.

My theory is that:
1. The path to win from a whole knight up is far simpler to find, certainly for humans, than other close or "equivalent" (in terms of cp) handicaps.
2. Top engines don't realise that they need to complicate the position against a human player with an extra knight. A grandmaster does. I don't think this knowledge is particularly useful in computer vs computer games (although surely complicating when you are losing is a good idea in theory, but AFAIK no one has made it work in terms of elo), but it would likely help in this sort of handicap match.

Play through the Komodo vs GM Neuman games at f2/c2 odds. His strategy as black was to build a solid pawn structure and then force trades on e4, simplfying into an easily winning endgame.

It took him a few games, and talking with a super-GM, to learn that plan.

[lkaufman]

Just a colloquial observation, but I am not that surprised by this result. I am 2100 FIDE, and (in my experience) can beat any engine with knight odds fairly consistently. It's just relatively straightforward to play simple openings and trade down.

Two pawns I lose nearly every single time, regardless of who moves first, which pawns, etc. I suspect three pawns, or exchange plus pawn(s) would be the same. I also suspect that it would be much harder to consistently convert a knight handicap against a super GM for example.

My theory is that:
1. The path to win from a whole knight up is far simpler to find, certainly for humans, than other close or "equivalent" (in terms of cp) handicaps.
2. Top engines don't realise that they need to complicate the position against a human player with an extra knight. A grandmaster does. I don't think this knowledge is particularly useful in computer vs computer games (although surely complicating when you are losing is a good idea in theory, but AFAIK no one has made it work in terms of elo), but it would likely help in this sort of handicap match.

Play through the Komodo vs GM Neuman games at f2/c2 odds. His strategy as black was to build a solid pawn structure and then force trades on e4, simplfying into an easily winning endgame.

It took him a few games, and talking with a super-GM, to learn that plan.

But somehow neither Neuman nor any other GM has found a way to win even a single game at any other two-White-pawn handicap yet (we haven't tried the huge f2,g2 handicap). I still don't understand why the c2,f2 pair should be so much worse for White than some other pairs. Maybe any pair with f2 gone (and not a2 gone) is tough for White.

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

Just a colloquial observation, but I am not that surprised by this result. I am 2100 FIDE, and (in my experience) can beat any engine with knight odds fairly consistently. It's just relatively straightforward to play simple openings and trade down.

Two pawns I lose nearly every single time, regardless of who moves first, which pawns, etc. I suspect three pawns, or exchange plus pawn(s) would be the same. I also suspect that it would be much harder to consistently convert a knight handicap against a super GM for example.

My theory is that:
1. The path to win from a whole knight up is far simpler to find, certainly for humans, than other close or "equivalent" (in terms of cp) handicaps.
2. Top engines don't realise that they need to complicate the position against a human player with an extra knight. A grandmaster does. I don't think this knowledge is particularly useful in computer vs computer games (although surely complicating when you are losing is a good idea in theory, but AFAIK no one has made it work in terms of elo), but it would likely help in this sort of handicap match.

Play through the Komodo vs GM Neuman games at f2/c2 odds. His strategy as black was to build a solid pawn structure and then force trades on e4, simplfying into an easily winning endgame.

It took him a few games, and talking with a super-GM, to learn that plan.

But somehow neither Neuman nor any other GM has found a way to win even a single game at any other two-White-pawn handicap yet (we haven't tried the huge f2,g2 handicap). I still don't understand why the c2,f2 pair should be so much worse for White than some other pairs. Maybe any pair with f2 gone (and not a2 gone) is tough for White.

it seems to be of purely psychological/human aspect.

with f2 and c2 pawns both missing, game necessarily gets closed in the center, for example after d4 d5, or e4 e5, or e4 e6(like SF plays) d4 d5 e5

in all cases, it is symmetrical and closed position in the center, and the human player saves a lot of energy on calculations and is much less prone to the risk of failing to a surprising tactics.

with other pawns, this is close to impossible to achieve, so humans have to suffer a lot more.

I bet f2 and g2 pawns missing will score much better for the engine, for the very same reasons, engine gets an open play full of tactics, although Komodo might score it as bigger advantage.

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

In view of the match loss, I ran a test to see if Komodo can give knight odds to a decent engine. I chose Fritz 11 running on 1 core, with Komodo able to use all 4 cores on my laptop. Time limit was 15 min plus 5 seconds, one third of the human match level but still much slower than blitz. Contempt set at 100 (I used 150 vs. Gilden). Alternating knight handicap.

Fritz 11 on 1 pcu is rated 2853 on the CCRL 40/40 list, which actually seems a bit low since it is several versions improved from the Fritz that defeated then-World Champion Kramnik in a match. I would bet on Fritz 11 1 cpu in a match with Magnus Carlsen, though it might be close.

Much to my surprise, Komodo (same version that played Gilden) won by 13 to 7 (12 wins, 6 losses, 2 draws). So in rapid chess, Komodo can decisively defeat a Magnus Carlsen level engine giving it knight odds, but lost all three games to a nearly 75 year old player with a FIDE rating of 2114. Pretty amazing difference. Perhaps Fritz 11 doesn't know to simplify when ahead, I don't know about that, but this surely isn't the whole answer. In most of the winning games Komodo whipped up a strong attack on the king, something that was never even a dream against Gilden.

Must be something to learn from this.

15 min. is certainly way shorter than 45 min., but I wonder why you allocated 4 cores to Komodo and only a single one to Fritz?

I bet, even with shorter TC, 2 min. per game, but equal conditions, equal cores, Fritz will beat Komodo.

[lkaufman]

In view of the match loss, I ran a test to see if Komodo can give knight odds to a decent engine. I chose Fritz 11 running on 1 core, with Komodo able to use all 4 cores on my laptop. Time limit was 15 min plus 5 seconds, one third of the human match level but still much slower than blitz. Contempt set at 100 (I used 150 vs. Gilden). Alternating knight handicap.

Fritz 11 on 1 pcu is rated 2853 on the CCRL 40/40 list, which actually seems a bit low since it is several versions improved from the Fritz that defeated then-World Champion Kramnik in a match. I would bet on Fritz 11 1 cpu in a match with Magnus Carlsen, though it might be close.

Much to my surprise, Komodo (same version that played Gilden) won by 13 to 7 (12 wins, 6 losses, 2 draws). So in rapid chess, Komodo can decisively defeat a Magnus Carlsen level engine giving it knight odds, but lost all three games to a nearly 75 year old player with a FIDE rating of 2114. Pretty amazing difference. Perhaps Fritz 11 doesn't know to simplify when ahead, I don't know about that, but this surely isn't the whole answer. In most of the winning games Komodo whipped up a strong attack on the king, something that was never even a dream against Gilden.

Must be something to learn from this.

15 min. is certainly way shorter than 45 min., but I wonder why you allocated 4 cores to Komodo and only a single one to Fritz?

I bet, even with shorter TC, 2 min. per game, but equal conditions, equal cores, Fritz will beat Komodo.

Probably so, but my Fritz 11 only runs on 1 core, and there are good reasons to think this is enough for it to win a match from Magnus Carlsen. The relevant CCRL rating for it is on one core. I could just as well have picked a four core engine with a similar rating if I had one installed.

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

In view of the match loss, I ran a test to see if Komodo can give knight odds to a decent engine. I chose Fritz 11 running on 1 core, with Komodo able to use all 4 cores on my laptop. Time limit was 15 min plus 5 seconds, one third of the human match level but still much slower than blitz. Contempt set at 100 (I used 150 vs. Gilden). Alternating knight handicap.

Fritz 11 on 1 pcu is rated 2853 on the CCRL 40/40 list, which actually seems a bit low since it is several versions improved from the Fritz that defeated then-World Champion Kramnik in a match. I would bet on Fritz 11 1 cpu in a match with Magnus Carlsen, though it might be close.

Much to my surprise, Komodo (same version that played Gilden) won by 13 to 7 (12 wins, 6 losses, 2 draws). So in rapid chess, Komodo can decisively defeat a Magnus Carlsen level engine giving it knight odds, but lost all three games to a nearly 75 year old player with a FIDE rating of 2114. Pretty amazing difference. Perhaps Fritz 11 doesn't know to simplify when ahead, I don't know about that, but this surely isn't the whole answer. In most of the winning games Komodo whipped up a strong attack on the king, something that was never even a dream against Gilden.

Must be something to learn from this.

15 min. is certainly way shorter than 45 min., but I wonder why you allocated 4 cores to Komodo and only a single one to Fritz?

I bet, even with shorter TC, 2 min. per game, but equal conditions, equal cores, Fritz will beat Komodo.

Probably so, but my Fritz 11 only runs on 1 core, and there are good reasons to think this is enough for it to win a match from Magnus Carlsen. The relevant CCRL rating for it is on one core. I could just as well have picked a four core engine with a similar rating if I had one installed.

don't you also have Komodo running on 1 core?

[lkaufman]

In view of the match loss, I ran a test to see if Komodo can give knight odds to a decent engine. I chose Fritz 11 running on 1 core, with Komodo able to use all 4 cores on my laptop. Time limit was 15 min plus 5 seconds, one third of the human match level but still much slower than blitz. Contempt set at 100 (I used 150 vs. Gilden). Alternating knight handicap.

Fritz 11 on 1 pcu is rated 2853 on the CCRL 40/40 list, which actually seems a bit low since it is several versions improved from the Fritz that defeated then-World Champion Kramnik in a match. I would bet on Fritz 11 1 cpu in a match with Magnus Carlsen, though it might be close.

Much to my surprise, Komodo (same version that played Gilden) won by 13 to 7 (12 wins, 6 losses, 2 draws). So in rapid chess, Komodo can decisively defeat a Magnus Carlsen level engine giving it knight odds, but lost all three games to a nearly 75 year old player with a FIDE rating of 2114. Pretty amazing difference. Perhaps Fritz 11 doesn't know to simplify when ahead, I don't know about that, but this surely isn't the whole answer. In most of the winning games Komodo whipped up a strong attack on the king, something that was never even a dream against Gilden.

Must be something to learn from this.

15 min. is certainly way shorter than 45 min., but I wonder why you allocated 4 cores to Komodo and only a single one to Fritz?

I bet, even with shorter TC, 2 min. per game, but equal conditions, equal cores, Fritz will beat Komodo.

Probably so, but my Fritz 11 only runs on 1 core, and there are good reasons to think this is enough for it to win a match from Magnus Carlsen. The relevant CCRL rating for it is on one core. I could just as well have picked a four core engine with a similar rating if I had one installed.

Sure, I could have run Komodo on one core only and probably it would have lost the match. The point was to show that Komodo, running on a normal laptop, could give knight odds in a rapid game to a Carlsen-rated engine.

don't you also have Komodo running on 1 core?

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

In view of the match loss, I ran a test to see if Komodo can give knight odds to a decent engine. I chose Fritz 11 running on 1 core, with Komodo able to use all 4 cores on my laptop. Time limit was 15 min plus 5 seconds, one third of the human match level but still much slower than blitz. Contempt set at 100 (I used 150 vs. Gilden). Alternating knight handicap.

Fritz 11 on 1 pcu is rated 2853 on the CCRL 40/40 list, which actually seems a bit low since it is several versions improved from the Fritz that defeated then-World Champion Kramnik in a match. I would bet on Fritz 11 1 cpu in a match with Magnus Carlsen, though it might be close.

Much to my surprise, Komodo (same version that played Gilden) won by 13 to 7 (12 wins, 6 losses, 2 draws). So in rapid chess, Komodo can decisively defeat a Magnus Carlsen level engine giving it knight odds, but lost all three games to a nearly 75 year old player with a FIDE rating of 2114. Pretty amazing difference. Perhaps Fritz 11 doesn't know to simplify when ahead, I don't know about that, but this surely isn't the whole answer. In most of the winning games Komodo whipped up a strong attack on the king, something that was never even a dream against Gilden.

Must be something to learn from this.

15 min. is certainly way shorter than 45 min., but I wonder why you allocated 4 cores to Komodo and only a single one to Fritz?

I bet, even with shorter TC, 2 min. per game, but equal conditions, equal cores, Fritz will beat Komodo.

Probably so, but my Fritz 11 only runs on 1 core, and there are good reasons to think this is enough for it to win a match from Magnus Carlsen. The relevant CCRL rating for it is on one core. I could just as well have picked a four core engine with a similar rating if I had one installed.

Sure, I could have run Komodo on one core only and probably it would have lost the match. The point was to show that Komodo, running on a normal laptop, could give knight odds in a rapid game to a Carlsen-rated engine.

don't you also have Komodo running on 1 core?

But Fritz beat Kramnik on 8 cores or so, and not a single core, so if you want to check how stronger is Komodo than the engine that played Kramnik, then you should use 8 cores.

apart from that, Carlsen is much stronger than Kramnik.

and a 3-rd clue: no one knows how Carlsen plays against computers: his play is very much reminiscent of a computer one, in any case.

[Uri Blass]

In view of the match loss, I ran a test to see if Komodo can give knight odds to a decent engine. I chose Fritz 11 running on 1 core, with Komodo able to use all 4 cores on my laptop. Time limit was 15 min plus 5 seconds, one third of the human match level but still much slower than blitz. Contempt set at 100 (I used 150 vs. Gilden). Alternating knight handicap.

Fritz 11 on 1 pcu is rated 2853 on the CCRL 40/40 list, which actually seems a bit low since it is several versions improved from the Fritz that defeated then-World Champion Kramnik in a match. I would bet on Fritz 11 1 cpu in a match with Magnus Carlsen, though it might be close.

Much to my surprise, Komodo (same version that played Gilden) won by 13 to 7 (12 wins, 6 losses, 2 draws). So in rapid chess, Komodo can decisively defeat a Magnus Carlsen level engine giving it knight odds, but lost all three games to a nearly 75 year old player with a FIDE rating of 2114. Pretty amazing difference. Perhaps Fritz 11 doesn't know to simplify when ahead, I don't know about that, but this surely isn't the whole answer. In most of the winning games Komodo whipped up a strong attack on the king, something that was never even a dream against Gilden.

Must be something to learn from this.

15 min. is certainly way shorter than 45 min., but I wonder why you allocated 4 cores to Komodo and only a single one to Fritz?

I bet, even with shorter TC, 2 min. per game, but equal conditions, equal cores, Fritz will beat Komodo.

Probably so, but my Fritz 11 only runs on 1 core, and there are good reasons to think this is enough for it to win a match from Magnus Carlsen. The relevant CCRL rating for it is on one core. I could just as well have picked a four core engine with a similar rating if I had one installed.

Sure, I could have run Komodo on one core only and probably it would have lost the match. The point was to show that Komodo, running on a normal laptop, could give knight odds in a rapid game to a Carlsen-rated engine.

don't you also have Komodo running on 1 core?

But Fritz beat Kramnik on 8 cores or so, and not a single core, so if you want to check how stronger is Komodo than the engine that played Kramnik, then you should use 8 cores.

apart from that, Carlsen is much stronger than Kramnik.

and a 3-rd clue: no one knows how Carlsen plays against computers: his play is very much reminiscent of a computer one, in any case.

The Fritz that beat kramnik is clearly weaker than Fritz11 1 core.